Hongtao Liu <crazy...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 9:51 PM Richard Sandiford
> <richard.sandif...@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> Vladimir Makarov via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
>> > On 2020-10-27 2:53 a.m., Hongtao Liu wrote:
>> >> Hi:
>> >> For inline asm, there could be an operand like (not (mem:)), it's
>> >> not a valid operand for normal memory constraint.
>> >> Bootstrap is ok, regression test is ok for make check
>> >> RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board='unix{-m32,}'"
>> >>
>> >> gcc/ChangeLog
>> >> PR target/97540
>> >> * ira.c: (ira_setup_alts): Extract memory from operand only
>> >> for special memory constraint.
>> >> * recog.c (asm_operand_ok): Ditto.
>> >> * lra-constraints.c (process_alt_operands): MEM_P is
>> >> required for normal memory constraint.
>> >>
>> >> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>> >> * gcc.target/i386/pr97540.c: New test.
>> >>
>> > I understand Richard's concerns and actually these concerns were my
>> > motivations to constraint possible cases for extract_mem_from_operand in
>> > the original patch introducing the function.
>> >
>> > If Richard proposes a better solution we will reconsider the current
>> > approach and revert the changes if it is necessary.
>> >
>> > Meanwhile I am approving this patch. I hope it will not demotivate
>> > Richard's attempt to find a better solution.
>>
>> OK, that's fine with me. I might come back to this next stage 1,
>> depending on how things turn out.
>>
>> Richard
>
> Thanks for all your comments, patch committed.
> And I'm not going to add "Br" to more patterns until the final
> solution is in place.
Please don't hold off on my account. I think any future update is
likely to be mechanical and having more example uses will be helpful.
Thanks,
Richard
